i see. most likely Victor is not getting Pd... possibly more pricy than hard gold with limited vendor... agree xrf is great. Pd react with solder form intermetallic (Pb/Sn), but better with SAC a bit... gold slow somewhat Pd IMC formation... On Nov 1, 2016, at 8:21 PM, George Wenger wrote: > TI introduced Pd over Ni lead frame material in 1989. In the late > '90s they reduced the Pd thickness because of the increase in the > price of Pd. Also, many users found that because of shelf live > issue TI began plating Au on the Pd to prevent the Pd layer from > losing its solderability (i.e., the Pd on the surface was exposed > to the environment and it did exactly what Pd in a cars catalytic > converter does and that is pull crap out of the environment). > > My previous comment was that a simple XRF measurement would tell > you if the plating was ENEPIG. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Yuan-chia Joyce Koo" <[log in to unmask]> > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 7:48:06 PM > Subject: Re: [TN] Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test) > > isn't that pd layer patented by TI? if your vendor didn't license > it, it wouldn't have Pd? (or is it? ) > On Nov 1, 2016, at 1:49 PM, Mattix, Dwight wrote: > >> Yes, XRF would point out the presence of Pd but that aside from the >> original question. That was about distinguishing hard >> (electrolytic) gold from ENIG. Seems that a section is still the >> simplest. Cut and polish a quickie, hold in a spring clip on the >> scope, no potting, just a matter of minutes. >> >> The mention of ENEPIG was just in passing to keep that possibility >> in mind. When in NYC one hears hoofbeats, think horses, not >> zebras. ;) >> >> >> From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 9:02 AM >> To: Mattix, Dwight <[log in to unmask]> >> Cc: Forum, TechNet <[log in to unmask]> >> Subject: Re: Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test) >> >> Since you don't have an XRF I understand why you said in your cast >> a section was quicker/easier but I'm sure if you hadn't lost your >> XRF in a reorganization you would do the XRF measurement because it >> would be much quicker/easier than a section >> >> ________________________________ >> From: "Dwight Mattix" >> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> Cc: "TechNet Forum" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 11:57:46 AM >> Subject: RE: Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test) >> >> Indeed. >> >> In my case, it’s quicker/easier to do a section from a solder >> sample. Lost XRF in a reorg… ☺ >> >> From: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 8:53 AM >> To: Mattix, Dwight >> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> Cc: Forum, TechNet <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> Subject: Re: Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test) >> >> Dwight, >> >> I agree with you that ENEPIG has been finding more use in contact >> applications but a simple XRF measurement would let you know if >> there were Pd between the ImmAu and the ENi.. >> >> George >> >> ________________________________ >> From: "Dwight Mattix" >> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> To: "TechNet E-Mail Forum" >> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>, >> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 11:42:21 AM >> Subject: RE: Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test) >> >> Yes, traditionally. However ENEPIG is finding more use in contact >> applications. It's not just a "universal" finish suitable for both >> soldering and bonding but it turns out also useful in many cases >> for contact wear resistance. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of George Wenger >> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 8:39 AM >> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> Subject: Re: [TN] Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test) >> >> Victor, >> >> In my opinion if you are talking about a metal contact or pin that >> I would assume that the gold plating is electrolytic plated >> Typically those types of metal contacts used to be electrolytic >> plated with thick gold (i.e., around 30 microinches) but over the >> years the trend has been to reduce costs and many companies reduced >> the electrolytic gold plating thickness to around 5 microinches. >> >> George >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "Victor G Hernandez" >> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 11:27:59 AM >> Subject: Re: [TN] Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test) >> >> This is true on a PWB gold finger. How about a connector contact >> pin/button? The contact has no edges per say. >> >> Victor, >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mattix, Dwight >> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 10:03 AM >> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> Subject: Re: [TN] Hard Au vs ENIG detection (was [TN] Test) >> >> X-section will tell very quickly whether it's hard Au or ENIG. Hard >> gold will have an overhang that extends out beyond the underlying >> etched copper. >> >> >> Hard gold is indeed an electrolytic process. As such, except in a >> few very specialized pwb fabs, it is applied before the outer layer >> is etched. The unetched, solid copper outerlayer serves as the buss >> for the electrolytic plating. A photoresist is applied to the >> outerlayer first so that the NiAu is plated on as the outerlayer >> circuit pattern. Then the photoresist is removed to expose the >> underlying copper. The panel is then etched and the NiAu pattern >> serves as the etch resist for the outerlayer circuit image. As that >> copper is etched down to the outer layer of laminate, it also >> etches horizontally back under the NiAu. The result is an >> overhanging "cornice" of NiAu along all the etched circuit edges. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Giamis, Andy >> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 7:45 AM >> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> Subject: Re: [TN] Test >> >> Hi Victor, >> The great and all-knowing Wikipedia says hard gold often contains a >> small amount of cobalt or nickel. >> I am also not an expert, but I believe hard gold is an electrolytic >> process. Although the electrolytic process can be stopped any time, >> typically target thicknesses are considerably thicker (30 micro- >> inches or more). If you are looking at 5 micro-inches, I'd guess it >> is immersion gold. The best action is to ask the supplier. If >> that's not an option, try EDS looking for cobalt. That's no >> guarantee, but positive results for cobalt would be informative. 5 >> micro-inches would be too thin to look for nickel. Good luck. >> >> Did I pass the test? >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of >> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 7:19 AM >> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> Subject: Re: [TN] Test >> >> Fellow TechNetters: >> >> I did not receive a response the FIRST time . therefore I pose the >> inquiry once again. >> >> “Is there a test or method to determine if gold plating is hard >> gold or ENIG? XRF will determine thickness of gold but will not >> verify plating process. I am working with a measurement of 5 micro >> inches of gold.” >> >> Victor, >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Hillman >> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 7:14 AM >> To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> Subject: Re: [TN] Test >> >> I don't know about the rest of the folks but I received an A+ and >> its rumored you received a C- >> >> Dave >> >> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Douglas Pauls < >> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> > >> wrote: >> >>> And what percentage of our grade is this test? >>> >>> >>> Doug Pauls >>> Principal Materials and Process Engineer Rockwell Collins >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Vadim Matveyev >>> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Test >>>> >>> >> >>